09/10 Champions League Thread.

[united]

As for the draw I'm indifferent. A huge amount of travel to face CSKA and Beskitas, and playing in Turkey is always difficult. However one has to be pleased with avoiding Real Madrid and Inter Milan. It will be interesting to see how Wolfsburg is this year after their success last year.

Groups C and F will be great.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by united

Eduardo fined by UEFA for diving against Celtic. Further review to take place September 1, 2009 (could face two match ban).
http://www.skysports.com/story/0,195...519726,00.html
Great news assuming it remains consistent. I think everyone supports this other than Arsenal FC and a few of their supporters. Hopefully it sets a precedent that will be followed regardless of team or player (wishful thinking, I know).

Arsene Wenger and Sir Alex both called for video replay on important decisions after the Celtic match. Tough debate but I think eventually they will have no choice.

I'm not sure anyone should have replay on fouls and ref decisions. No sport does that and it would set a dangerous precedent.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I'm not sure anyone should have replay on fouls and ref decisions. No sport does that and it would set a dangerous precedent.

No sport does it? Actually tons of sports do it, soccer is miles behind in this regard.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by valo403

No sport does it? Actually tons of sports do it, soccer is miles behind in this regard.

Really? Fouls? Give me an example.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Really? Fouls? Give me an example.

The NFL reviews plays and hands out suspensions and fines based on video evidence, as does the NHL, the NBA, and MLB. Only one of them calls them "fouls" but they all review actions outside of the rules in order to institute supplementary discipline.

If you're talking about in game review all 4 of those leagues also use vidoe to review referee/umpire decisions. Many NFL referee decisions are reviewable, spots of the ball, fumbles, boundaries etc. are all decisions made by a referee and corrected by video. High stick goals, nets off the moorings, pucks crossing the line are all referee decisions reviewed by video. I'm not a big NBA follower, but I know that issues of release are reviewable at the buzzers/shot-clock. Finally, MLB umpires now have the benefit of using video to review HR calls.

The NFL is the most comparable, many of the challengeable plays are matters of officials judgment just as they would be in soccer.

I don't see the "dangerous precedent", what's so dangerous about getting calls correct? If you want diving out of the game create a system which makes it possible for referees to spot them at the time and prevent a diver from earning a penalty.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by valo403

The NFL reviews plays and hands out suspensions and fines based on video evidence, as does the NHL, the NBA, and MLB. Only one of them calls them "fouls" but they all review actions outside of the rules in order to institute supplementary discipline.

If you're talking about in game review all 4 of those leagues also use vidoe to review referee/umpire decisions. Many NFL referee decisions are reviewable, spots of the ball, fumbles, boundaries etc. are all decisions made by a referee and corrected by video. High stick goals, nets off the moorings, pucks crossing the line are all referee decisions reviewed by video. I'm not a big NBA follower, but I know that issues of release are reviewable at the buzzers/shot-clock. Finally, MLB umpires now have the benefit of using video to review HR calls.

The NFL is the most comparable, many of the challengeable plays are matters of officials judgment just as they would be in soccer.

I don't see the "dangerous precedent", what's so dangerous about getting calls correct? If you want diving out of the game create a system which makes it possible for referees to spot them at the time and prevent a diver from earning a penalty.

Ah I see what you mean. Forget I said ref's decisions.

But I always though only definite black and white line calls or high sticks or balls hitting the ground are reviewable.

But getting into fouls and diving is a grey area. I know the Eduardo thing was obvious but not all calls are. Something I think is a foul or a dive, you might not.

You can't review penalties, pass interference, or balls and strikes. It's the judgement of the ref. If you send if to replay it'll be in the hands of another person. Even when we watch replay we're not sure if something is a foul or not.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Ah I see what you mean. Forget I said ref's decisions.

But I always though only definite black and white line calls or high sticks or balls hitting the ground are reviewable.

But getting into fouls and diving is a grey area. I know the Eduardo thing was obvious but not all calls are. Something I think is a foul or a dive, you might not.

You can't review penalties, pass interference, or balls and strikes. It's the judgement of the ref. If you send if to replay it'll be in the hands of another person. Even when we watch replay we're not sure if something is a foul or not.

You can review plenty of judgment calls in the NFL, did a knee touch the ground before the ball was released is just as much a judgment call as whether a player made contact on a tackle in the box, and both are equally subject to confirmation over reversal by review.

You'd have to setup a challenge type system IMO, and I don't see that ever happening, but the arguments against it are pretty weak (even though I'm sure they'll win out in reality). The major argument I've heard is the whole 'flow of the game' story, which is utter crap as any controversial penalty call is followed by at least 3 minutes of guys yelling at the ref and other goings on. Fill that time with a prompt review and we're in the exact same place with a proper call being made, or at least one based on proper evidence. The other person making a decision argument doesn't fly either, linesmen and 4th officials already ahve huge input into decisions so adding a video ref doesn't drastically change anything. Besides, it's not hard to setup video screens near each penalty area to allow the actual official to do the viewing.

I think for penalty calls it's crucial that all the available evidence is use. You're basically handing a team a goal, and possibly a win, that's something that needs to be done correctly. I'm confident video review won't be allowed for a long time, I mean they won't even allow it for the easiest most black and white issue of whether a ball crossed the line.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by valo403

You can review plenty of judgment calls in the NFL, did a knee touch the ground before the ball was released is just as much a judgment call as whether a player made contact on a tackle in the box, and both are equally subject to confirmation over reversal by review.

You'd have to setup a challenge type system IMO, and I don't see that ever happening, but the arguments against it are pretty weak (even though I'm sure they'll win out in reality). The major argument I've heard is the whole 'flow of the game' story, which is utter crap as any controversial penalty call is followed by at least 3 minutes of guys yelling at the ref and other goings on. Fill that time with a prompt review and we're in the exact same place with a proper call being made, or at least one based on proper evidence. The other person making a decision argument doesn't fly either, linesmen and 4th officials already ahve huge input into decisions so adding a video ref doesn't drastically change anything. Besides, it's not hard to setup video screens near each penalty area to allow the actual official to do the viewing.

I think for penalty calls it's crucial that all the available evidence is use. You're basically handing a team a goal, and possibly a win, that's something that needs to be done correctly. I'm confident video review won't be allowed for a long time, I mean they won't even allow it for the easiest most black and white issue of whether a ball crossed the line.

Yeah flow of the game is crap. We wait 4 years for a World Cup, what's another 5 minutes?

I think knee hitting the ground is pretty definitive.

But reviewing fouls are still very iffy. Did he stick his leg out, did he cause the player to fall. My the player tripped over the foot that was already there. What about offsides? If the flag goes up it's offside and everyone stops. You can't go back and continue the play as if it would have happened.

What about handball. Going to replay to determine a penalty of handball might be a disaster. Ball to hand, hand to ball, ball hits armpit etc....

[The Special One]

I'm not in favour of in-game video review, but I would like to see the various governing bodies have the authority from FIFA to retroactively ban players for cheating. Scotland tried to put this in last year and FIFA threatened to expel their national team from the World Cup qualifiers.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Yeah flow of the game is crap. We wait 4 years for a World Cup, what's another 5 minutes?

I think knee hitting the ground is pretty definitive.

But reviewing fouls are still very iffy. Did he stick his leg out, did he cause the player to fall. My the player tripped over the foot that was already there. What about offsides? If the flag goes up it's offside and everyone stops. You can't go back and continue the play as if it would have happened.

What about handball. Going to replay to determine a penalty of handball might be a disaster. Ball to hand, hand to ball, ball hits armpit etc....

A knee hitting the ground is definitive on occasion, just as a defender making contact to bring a man down is definitive on occasion. On many other occasions a knee hitting the ground is far from definitive, it may have taken place in a pile, there may be issues of possession of the ball at the time the knee hit etc. There are a ton of potential scenarios where an NFL officials judgment is reviewed by video.

I still don't see what's iffy. How is it iffy for an official to get an opportunity to look at video of an incident before making his decision? How many times have we seen poor penalty decisions based on an official having a crap view of the tackle? A tackle may look like a clear foul from behind but swing around the other side and it's a clean play, all this does is allow the official to see what he would have seen from that position. I can't figure out how that is iffy.

As for handball, a potential disaster? C'mon, now you're just being dramatic. Video allows the official to determine where the ball was played, so the ball off the top of the shoulder calls are eliminated, that's about as definitive as it gets. As for ball to hand/hand to ball, I don't think anyone has ever indicated that video allows for intentions to be read, but it does offer more evidence. The official has the added benefit of seeing whether a hand was thrown out at the ball, or whether it was already there and struck by the ball.

Honestly, I've yet to hear a single solid argument against using video review. People have simply decided that it's no good without actually taking the time to think about it.

[Pagal4321]

Eduardo's dive was pretty deplorable, that I'll agree with. He should have gotten a yellow card for it, with no penalty given. The fine? Sure, makes sense, I wish they'd start fining players for dives. But a retroactive two match ban??

Had he received a yellow card in the game, all of this would have been forgotten. But now it's being BLOWN UP in the media, and Eduardo is being singled out.

I have no issue if they banned him but then banned EVERY player that did the same thing, even if his name is Ronaldo or Rooney or Drogba or Torres. Sadly, I don't think that will be the case.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Pagal4321

Eduardo's dive was pretty deplorable, that I'll agree with. He should have gotten a yellow card for it, with no penalty given. The fine? Sure, makes sense, I wish they'd start fining players for dives. But a retroactive two match ban??

Had he received a yellow card in the game, all of this would have been forgotten. But now it's being BLOWN UP in the media, and Eduardo is being singled out.

I have no issue if they banned him but then banned EVERY player that did the same thing, even if his name is Ronaldo or Rooney or Drogba or Torres. Sadly, I don't think that will be the case.

I think Eduardo should face a ban, but I agree that he shouldn't be alone. If you dive to earn a penalty you receive a ban, regardless of who you are.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by valo403

A knee hitting the ground is definitive on occasion, just as a defender making contact to bring a man down is definitive on occasion. On many other occasions a knee hitting the ground is far from definitive, it may have taken place in a pile, there may be issues of possession of the ball at the time the knee hit etc. There are a ton of potential scenarios where an NFL officials judgment is reviewed by video.

I still don't see what's iffy. How is it iffy for an official to get an opportunity to look at video of an incident before making his decision? How many times have we seen poor penalty decisions based on an official having a crap view of the tackle? A tackle may look like a clear foul from behind but swing around the other side and it's a clean play, all this does is allow the official to see what he would have seen from that position. I can't figure out how that is iffy.

As for handball, a potential disaster? C'mon, now you're just being dramatic. Video allows the official to determine where the ball was played, so the ball off the top of the shoulder calls are eliminated, that's about as definitive as it gets. As for ball to hand/hand to ball, I don't think anyone has ever indicated that video allows for intentions to be read, but it does offer more evidence. The official has the added benefit of seeing whether a hand was thrown out at the ball, or whether it was already there and struck by the ball.

Honestly, I've yet to hear a single solid argument against using video review. People have simply decided that it's no good without actually taking the time to think about it.

It's all fine until it happens to your team.

I like review for definitive things. I think the hockey review system is wonderful. Tennis is the best, it's a ball hitting a line and it takes 2 seconds.

But I don't like it for fouls. Yes handball would be a disaster. It's the hardest thing to judge. There are literally thousands of handballs that could go either way. I'm totally convinced that if a ref made an incorrect call and got to see it on a replay screen, they would still not change it cause in their opinion, they were right. Soccer refs act like little dictators. Total control freaks.

It takes something outrageous like the Eduardo dive to open UEFA's eyes. It would take something more outrageous to bring in replay. Like another 1966 Geoff Hurst goal that never went in, except this time the victim is Brazil.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

It's all fine until it happens to your team.

I like review for definitive things. I think the hockey review system is wonderful. Tennis is the best, it's a ball hitting a line and it takes 2 seconds.

But I don't like it for fouls. Yes handball would be a disaster. It's the hardest thing to judge. There are literally thousands of handballs that could go either way. I'm totally convinced that if a ref made an incorrect call and got to see it on a replay screen, they would still not change it cause in their opinion, they were right. Soccer refs act like little dictators. Total control freaks.

It takes something outrageous like the Eduardo dive to open UEFA's eyes. It would take something more outrageous to bring in replay. Like another 1966 Geoff Hurst goal that never went in, except this time the victim is Brazil.

How would handballs be a disaster? Viewing something from other, likely better, angles is a disaster?

I'm sorry, you still haven't provided a single argument for why video review is 'going to be a disaster'. Like most people who come to this conclusion you aren't backing it up, you simply state a conclusion and that's that.

I find your love of the hockey review system to further weaken your conclusion. A video review of a potential highstick goal is great, but a video review of a potential handball is a disaster? Care to explain how those two situations are so drastically different? And no, highstick reviews don't give definitive answers.

[Pagal4321]

Originally Posted by valo403

I think Eduardo should face a ban, but I agree that he shouldn't be alone. If you dive to earn a penalty you receive a ban, regardless of who you are.

But I'd pretty much guarantee if Eduardo is given a ban, that trend won't be followed in the later stages of the tournament.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Pagal4321

But I'd pretty much guarantee if Eduardo is given a ban, that trend won't be followed in the later stages of the tournament.

Ya, but that's sort of the nature of all of these things isn't it? I can't think of a single league where the punishments don't vary when the acts are never identical.

I would like to see the blatant, no contact at all, throw myself to the ground and writhe in agony dive get an automatic 2 game ban, and the 'embellishment' dives face a potential one match ban depending on past history, warnings in the match etc. I can deal with the embellishments to a point, mostly because I don't think they'll ever go away, but the really flagrant acts need to be punished severely.

[SebC]

It would be pretty easy to introduce replay on a limited basis:

1) Review for offside when a goal is scored (if not obvious).
2) Review for ball crossing the line when a goal is scored (if not obvious).
3) Review for ball crossing the line when a goal is not scored (challenge system, replay at next stoppage).
4) Automatic review for all called penalty shots.

Nothing you can do for an onside that's called offside, uncalled fouls etc.

[SeoulFire]

Originally Posted by Pagal4321

Eduardo's dive was pretty deplorable, that I'll agree with. He should have gotten a yellow card for it, with no penalty given. The fine? Sure, makes sense, I wish they'd start fining players for dives. But a retroactive two match ban??

Had he received a yellow card in the game, all of this would have been forgotten. But now it's being BLOWN UP in the media, and Eduardo is being singled out.

I have no issue if they banned him but then banned EVERY player that did the same thing, even if his name is Ronaldo or Rooney or Drogba or Torres. Sadly, I don't think that will be the case.

Useless and irrelevant considering the amount of money these guys make. The fines would have to be astronomical for them to have any effect.

Cheating (ie diving) has been pretty much institutionalized in the game and it will take strong measure to take it out - and bans may just be able to do that.

I would have no problem with retroactive bans (increasingly strict) that are based on video evidence as long as (like you stated) all players are treated equally. As for Eduardo being singled out...it has to start somewhere.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by SebC

It would be pretty easy to introduce replay on a limited basis:

1) Review for offside when a goal is scored (if not obvious).
2) Review for ball crossing the line when a goal is scored (if not obvious).
3) Review for ball crossing the line when a goal is not scored (challenge system, replay at next stoppage).
4) Automatic review for all called penalty shots.

Nothing you can do for an onside that's called offside, uncalled fouls etc.

I would hope that onside plays would be less likely to be ruled offside as the linesman would be able to give the benefit of the doubt and have the video make the final call.

For the first 3 you could easily have an official devoted to watching the replay in a booth and radioing in the ruling, but for the penalties I'd like to see the on-field official have the opportunity to look at the video in order to further educate his decision. It would be incredibly easy to install a monitor at each goal area to achieve this in the same amount of time currently spent dealing with protesting players.

[Pagal4321]

Originally Posted by SeoulFire

As for Eduardo being singled out...it has to start somewhere.

And you think this is going to start something??

Diving has been around forever, and I highly doubt it's going anywhere.

I'd be happy if this ban (because we all know he will get one) would lead to stricter rules on diving. But it won't.